Wednesday, December 30, 2015

Several conservative news outlets have noted with alarm that the EPA
has helped
send 185 people to prison for "environmental crimes" over the
past year. What's worse than that? The reaction coming from many on the right, for starters:

First, while the EPA certainly ought
to be abolished for imposing improper and non-objective
law, some of the actions it penalizes might well be crimes even
under a proper government. Indeed, with the standard of law being the
protection of individual rights rather than "the environment," some of
those things might merit even harsher punishments. That is to say, the
number of people imprisoned or the amount of time, neither alone nor
together, are a valid criticism of this meddlesome agency outside the
context of what the government ought to be doing. I think it would be
safe to say that the EPA both unjustly imprisons the
innocent and fails to punish the guilty
enough.

Second, you can't have your cake and eat it,
too. If the EPA is right to impose criminal penalties, why complain that it is
enforcing the law? If it's wrong to do so, why complain
that it isn't effective? While the EPA dragging its feet may indicate
hypocrisy, corruption, or incompetence, any or all of these issues
pale in comparison to the fact that the EPA exists at all. Until such
time as the EPA can be abolished, we should be relieved that it has
the poor image and self-limitations that will make it less able to
tyrannize us. And we should concentrate on getting rid of it.

The public should stop tolerating
politicians who seem to (?) wish for a more competent tyranny.